The Instigator
missbailey8
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
unknownmystery
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Sports stars are paid too much money

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
missbailey8
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/24/2016 Category: Sports
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 528 times Debate No: 90139
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

missbailey8

Pro

I'll be arguing that professional sports stars make too much money. My opponent will be arguing that professional sport stars don't make too much money.

Round 1 - Acceptance
Round 2 - Opening Statements
Round 3 - Rebuttals
Round 4 - Summary
unknownmystery

Con

I disagree to the fact that Sports stars are paid too much money. From the definition of the dictionary, A sport star is a celebrated or extremely famous sportsperson. There are many reasons why they are highly paid.
Debate Round No. 1
missbailey8

Pro

Thank you for accepting the debate! Let's get started. I'll be arguing that professional athletes make too much money.

First, I'll compare the salary of American football player Jamon Brown to other jobs. Jamon Brown makes an average of $810,815 a year. [1] Let's use the salary of a police officer to put that perspective. We'll call him Joe. Joe makes an average of $48,815 a year, a fraction of Jamon's pay. [2]

What about a job in the Navy? Depending on your position, you can make somewhere in between $28,982 to $135,807. [3] So someone fighting for our country is making less than a professional athlete? They're risking their lives. 96.5 out of 10,000 deaths is the rate per year of people serving in the Navy. [4] In high school football only 12 deaths occur a year and those are the highest statistics for deaths in the sport, even in professional football. [5] So why does a professional athlete make more than the average person enlisted in the

My mother and father were in the Navy. And in the case of my father, he spent a total of 15 years in both the Navy and the Army. I was their first born child and we had to go on food stamps due to the poor household income. Things didn't get better when my brother was born a year later. My mom resigned to stay home with us. But we had more problems than our household income. My dad suffered from PTSD and my mother with anxiety all because of their time served.

We weren't given any slack. And when we had to move all over the country and had to survive off of minimal income these pro athletes were rolling in money? While my family suffered because my parents decided to serve others were living scot free because they were part of the NFL? Why?

Anyway, others who save lives are paid significantly less than others in the entertainment industry. It takes years of experience and training to be an athlete and a police officer alike, but would you rather that salary go to a football player or Joe the police officer?

When you think of it, we really don't need professional sports. They're a source of entertainment for some, but they aren't necessary when it comes down to it, but we need police officers. We need a justice system to ensure that we aren't consumed in anarchy, yet police officers make less than athletes because of the entertainment industry being very profitable.

We can use the Monet that professional athletes make for better things. We can use the $22,133,333 yearly salary of Joe Flacco to raise money for diseases, to feed the hungry, to build a school in Africa, to house the homeless, anything. [6] We can build 1770 schools in Angola with Flacco's yearly salary alone. [7] We can feed 1472 families of four for a year with that money. [8] Why can't we make a change with that much money instead of tossing it in the millions to people who can do without the excess?

In conclusion, professional athletes should be paid much less due to the points above. I look forward to your opening statements of the debate. Thank you. Peace.

Citations
[1, 6]http://www.spotrac.com...
[2]http://www.payscale.com...
[3]http://www.payscale.com...
[4]http://www.google.com...
[5]http://www.nydailynews.com...
[7]http://illinoisreview.typepad.com...
[8]http://www.usatoday.com...
unknownmystery

Con

Thank you for you interesting argument. I feel that being in a navy is playing a part to protect the country when the country sovereighty is threatened. They help to protect the country from what most of us can see. You also said that there are many people died in the Navy. If you see it that way in which saying that the navy or the people in the military jobs should paid more, then what about those country where all fit men must serve the military force? The government would need to pay a large sum of money for each one them, then what happened to the rest of the people who are not in the defence force? Their livelihood would be affected as the government would increase the taxes that working population need to paid so that they will have enough money to pay the high salaries of the navy and police officer. Furthermore, it is not only the police officer or the navy protecting the country, everyone play an important role in protecting the country. People should have pride in their country and willing to stand up to defend their country when terrorist attack instead of running away.
Coming back the the topic. I felt that Sport Stars are not really paid too much money.
Firstly, I would like to point out that money that these sports stars earn from advertisements is not always directly as a result of their talent but more of their marketability and their "star factor". It is not so much because Maria Sharapova can hit a tennis ball across the court that she is in such demand by advertisers. When David Beckham was said to have lost his magic touch in his freekicks, he was still often seem on glossy posers for "Gillette". Hence, the fact that the huge amounts of money that sport stars earn does not completely stem from their talent is enough for any discerning people to think that the athletes" talents only constitutes a small portion of the total sum that they get, and thus, it cannot always be said that they are paid too much money for their talent.
Secondly, becoming a sport star is not as simple as what most people can see. Sport Stars have went through endless of mental and physical training to enable them to develop a right state of mind for the upcoming competition they have to attend. Sport Stars are like swords. They shine in the battlegrounds. Every sword you see is the product of someone's blood, sweat, and tears. Same for Sport stars , they put in their effort into the sports. Being good at a sport does not come naturally from a human, it is through tedious training. Sometimes things may not turn out to be what as expected, through training they may end up injured themselves as excelling in sport may not seem that easy. Sport Stars deserved to be paid more.
And furthermore, due to globalisation, more countries are attracting talented people to come to their country to earn income to earn more money. Talented people are in need. Sport Stars is counted as talented people. They have a talent in playing sports. When government attracted these people to come to their country, they will earn recognition as what follows behind them are all the media and the fans that support them. More people will come to the country to visit them to see them, the government can meanwhile can earn revenue fro the fans of the Sports Star that came from overseas, which will indeed improve the economy of the country. Companies such as NIKE would also like to invite sports star to promote their products through media such as advertisement. Not everybody can be a sport star, that why they are highly paid as they deserved it.
I end of by saying sport stars are highly paid because they deserved it.
( Its kind of like last minute)
Thank you.
God bless.
Debate Round No. 2
missbailey8

Pro

Thank you for your response. Here's my rebuttal.

Firstly, I'll be focusing on my opponent's argument that sport stars earn most of their money from endorsements. This really depends on the player and how well known they are. My opponent also claims that talent doesn't play into endorsements that much. How likely is a company going to endorse a football player if they can't score a touchdown to save their life? Marketability taps into how much talent they have.

I'd also like to point out that the bare minimum pay of an NFL player is around $295,000 a year without endorsements. [1] Wouldn't you love to make that much as a minimum? To compare, the average American family has a household income of $52,250 a year. [2] Keep in mind that the NFL doesn't know for sure how much the player can make in endorsements. It really depends.

Secondly, I'll show the eight week boot camp system for someone looking to be in the Navy, as I couldn't find the exact training for a football player.

Here's week one: "The first week will also be filled with conditioning, swimming, marching, drilling, and most importantly, attending Navy classes. Everything you do from this point on is designed to prepare you for what lies ahead. You will push your physical limits and achieve higher performance levels than you ever thought possible." In the first week alone you'll push yourself beyond your limits. [3]

Here's a more grueling example I found from week six: "Another academic test, and perhaps the most challenging of all, is the Confidence Chamber. Inside the Chamber, you and about 100 other recruits will line up and put on a gas mask while a tear gas tablet is lit. You’ll be ordered to remove your mask and throw it in a trash can while reciting your full name and social security number.... Every Sailor before you has mastered it and so will you." Who would go through this?!

This are only two examples of the training program for the eight week boot camp. You have to use live firearms, march in formation, learn CPR, do battle scenarios, learn Navy customs, recognize flags, the list goes on and on. Football players don't have to do all of this. Their training is probably also extreme, they have a very low death rate like I stated in my opening statements. According to a survey, 28% of veterans suffer from PTSD or Depression. [4] How often does it happen with football players?

Thirdly, I'll address the first argument made by my opponent in their response. I think it depends on your rank, whether you're part-time or full-time, etc. And when the draft did exist not all men had to go. It was a lottery and you had to be 18-26-years-old. You also have to pass a physical and mental exam. [5] That eliminates all men to a smaller portion size.

Thank you. Peace.

Citations
[1]http://nflsalaries.org...
[2]http://www.mybudget360.com...
[3]http://www.military.com...
[4]http://www.military.com...
[5]http://www.militaryspot.com...
unknownmystery

Con

unknownmystery forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
missbailey8

Pro

My argument extends.
unknownmystery

Con

unknownmystery forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Samcoder1 10 months ago
Samcoder1
Interesting debate! I don't have time to do it myself, although my two cents would be no, they aren't.'too much' either means too much for them (which I doubt) or too much for other people i.e they lose out because a footballer is getting more money. This isn't how the economy works, I'f I get a raise, someone else doesn't have their wages cut. Money is constantly being made, not lost, so them having enormous amounts doesn't ultimately affect anyone else.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by firefury14620 9 months ago
firefury14620
missbailey8unknownmysteryTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited, for one thing. Another thing is that Pro used sources while Con struggled to hold on to his own argument.
Vote Placed by Kirigaya-Kazuto 9 months ago
Kirigaya-Kazuto
missbailey8unknownmysteryTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited many times, I consider this a full concession on their part.